This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Sandtrap
Pages: 1 ... 219220221 222223 ... 390
6601
« on: May 04, 2015, 09:25:40 PM »
Reaction =/= Expression
And murder isn't protected under law or a bill of rights. And disregarding all of that, murder still isn't expression.
Sure it is. It is a form of expression because somebody got pissed off enough to consider committing it. You don't just go up and murder for no apparent reason.
Protesters with signs? Angry and displeased with something. They take their anger out and make their point known with signs.
Murder is violent, and violence is usually associated with anger, so, factually, yes, murder is a form of expression. It's just at the far end of the scales. It's the extreme end to how far you can go to express hatred or dislike of another human being or their actions.
Is it right? No. It causes damage, inflicts trauma. Ruins lives. It's a negative form of expression. But, it is still a form of expression because the people on the other end were upset or angered enough to consider action.
Just because it doesn't fall under the written paper documents of protected freedoms of speech, doesn't make it a null thing. "Freedom of Speech" is just a fancy formality. A guidline to generally streamline what is acceptable as expressing yourself or your views.
Murdering someone because you're angry is a reaction, not expression. Look the words up in a dictionary.
Do the math here. What does a protester feel?
Anger. Dissatisfaction.
What do they do? They react. The react to their feeling and they act out on it.
Emotion is the core root of any expression, and expression comes in many, many different forms. How about a kid who steals things? Where one person might just wave them off as a troublemaker, somebody else might look at them and see something more.
A cry for help. A plea for attention, to get it directed on them. The only tool they have at their disposal. Would you not count that as a form of expression?
Somebody's whose angry or stressed, with a lot of trauma in childhood might inexplicably fight. They'd fght and fight all the time because it's a silent unspoken form of expression and showing it.
Expression can take any form so long as the means to do so are available. It all depends on the mind of the person.
A rational person who would disagree with drawings of that fellows name which I can't remember, might protest in response. A non rational person, aka the shooters, shoot up the place.
And that's how they reacted. It's not expression.
It really doesn't matter either way. This is semantics.
Here's the definition of a very special word for you. Today's word is, Extremism. Extremism means, literally: driving (something) to the limit, to the extreme. Nowadays, the term is mostly being used in a political or religious sense, for an ideology that is considered (by the speaker) to be far outside the (acceptable) mainstream attitudes of society.[citation needed] But extremism can for example also be meant in an economic sense - et cetera. The term "extremism" is usually meant pejorative: to express (strong) disapproval, but it may also be meant in a more academic, purely descriptive, non-condemning sense. Extremists are usually contrasted with centrists or moderates. For example, in contemporary discussions in Western countries of Islam or of Islamic political movements, the distinction between extremist (= 'bad') and moderate (= 'good') Muslims is typically stressed. Political agendas perceived as extremist often include those from the far left or far right, as well as radicalism, reactionism, fundamentalism, and fanaticism. So yes. It is a form of expression. Shooting up somebody for drawing a religious figure sure fucking sounds like strong dissaproval to me. Strong disaproval of something can be acted upon in many different ways. However, on the last point, yes, it is semantics. But on the point of murder not being a form of expression? Well, there's the dictionary term right there for you. Deny it all you want but fundamentally in a basic mathematical formula, this is a constant. Action+Emotional stimulus=Reaction Reaction=Expression of Emotional Stimulus So to that end, some people got pissed off, and rather than be rational human beings they decided to express their viewpoint by trying to kill people. And now they're dead and gone and the game's over. And that's that.
6602
« on: May 04, 2015, 09:10:18 PM »
Reaction =/= Expression
And murder isn't protected under law or a bill of rights. And disregarding all of that, murder still isn't expression.
Sure it is. It is a form of expression because somebody got pissed off enough to consider committing it. You don't just go up and murder for no apparent reason.
Protesters with signs? Angry and displeased with something. They take their anger out and make their point known with signs.
Murder is violent, and violence is usually associated with anger, so, factually, yes, murder is a form of expression. It's just at the far end of the scales. It's the extreme end to how far you can go to express hatred or dislike of another human being or their actions.
Is it right? No. It causes damage, inflicts trauma. Ruins lives. It's a negative form of expression. But, it is still a form of expression because the people on the other end were upset or angered enough to consider action.
Just because it doesn't fall under the written paper documents of protected freedoms of speech, doesn't make it a null thing. "Freedom of Speech" is just a fancy formality. A guidline to generally streamline what is acceptable as expressing yourself or your views.
Murdering someone because you're angry is a reaction, not expression. Look the words up in a dictionary.
Do the math here. What does a protester feel? Anger. Dissatisfaction. What do they do? They react. The react to their feeling and they act out on it. Emotion is the core root of any expression, and expression comes in many, many different forms. How about a kid who steals things? Where one person might just wave them off as a troublemaker, somebody else might look at them and see something more. A cry for help. A plea for attention, to get it directed on them. The only tool they have at their disposal. Would you not count that as a form of expression? Somebody's whose angry or stressed, with a lot of trauma in childhood might inexplicably fight. They'd fght and fight all the time because it's a silent unspoken form of expression and showing it. Expression can take any form so long as the means to do so are available. It all depends on the mind of the person. A rational person who would disagree with drawings of that fellows name which I can't remember, might protest in response. A non rational person, aka the shooters, shoot up the place.
6603
« on: May 04, 2015, 09:00:02 PM »
The only thing "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Expression" do, is opt to the better side of expression.
So yes, that shooting falls not under freedom of expression, but it falls under expression because obviously somebody got pissed off about it and went out to shoot some people.
Not true, it's like Popper's paradox of intolerance.
A society which values tolerance must be intolerant of intolerance to some degree. It's a meta-behaviour to protect the wider value. As such, actions which limit others' freedom of expression must themselves be limited. Is this erring on the "better side" of expression, no I wouldn't say so. A Salafist Muslim is free to argue all he likes that apostates should be killed, but when you actually kill apostates you're very obviously harming other individuals' freedom to their own expression.
It's not about protecting some forms of expression over others; it's about protecting expression as widely as is possible.
Which I agree with. But all the same, shutting one's head in the sand and thinking that there aren't people who don't play nice, who don't particularily adhere to playing nice, is stupid.
I mean really. How in the fuck could you not expect some form of trouble at an event like that? I'm not saying that they asked for the trouble they got or that they deserved it. But at the same time, not expecting trouble to arrive is a mistake.
with 40 people guarding the place i'm pretty sure they were prepared for trouble
Well that's good then. Could have been a lot worse if they weren't.
6604
« on: May 04, 2015, 08:57:26 PM »
Reaction =/= Expression
And murder isn't protected under law or a bill of rights. And disregarding all of that, murder still isn't expression.
Sure it is. It is a form of expression because somebody got pissed off enough to consider committing it. You don't just go up and murder for no apparent reason. Protesters with signs? Angry and displeased with something. They take their anger out and make their point known with signs. Murder is violent, and violence is usually associated with anger, so, factually, yes, murder is a form of expression. It's just at the far end of the scales. It's the extreme end to how far you can go to express hatred or dislike of another human being or their actions. Is it right? No. It causes damage, inflicts trauma. Ruins lives. It's a negative form of expression. But, it is still a form of expression because the people on the other end were upset or angered enough to consider action. Just because it doesn't fall under the written paper documents of protected freedoms of speech, doesn't make it a null thing. "Freedom of Speech" is just a fancy formality. A guidline to generally streamline what is acceptable as expressing yourself or your views.
6605
« on: May 04, 2015, 08:45:28 PM »
veering uncomfortably close to islamophobia here..
That's what I hate about threads like these. They just end up being Islamophobic circlejerks.
im all for criticism of religion, but when you use vitriol like this its just... i dont even want to read posts so full of hate.
some people would do well to remember that we are all born equal and we all die equal.
 Yes. We all die equal.
6606
« on: May 04, 2015, 08:42:32 PM »
The only thing "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Expression" do, is opt to the better side of expression.
So yes, that shooting falls not under freedom of expression, but it falls under expression because obviously somebody got pissed off about it and went out to shoot some people.
Not true, it's like Popper's paradox of intolerance.
A society which values tolerance must be intolerant of intolerance to some degree. It's a meta-behaviour to protect the wider value. As such, actions which limit others' freedom of expression must themselves be limited. Is this erring on the "better side" of expression, no I wouldn't say so. A Salafist Muslim is free to argue all he likes that apostates should be killed, but when you actually kill apostates you're very obviously harming other individuals' freedom to their own expression.
It's not about protecting some forms of expression over others; it's about protecting expression as widely as is possible.
Which I agree with. But all the same, shutting one's head in the sand and thinking that there aren't people who don't play nice, who don't particularily adhere to playing nice, is stupid. I mean really. How in the fuck could you not expect some form of trouble at an event like that? I'm not saying that they asked for the trouble they got or that they deserved it. But at the same time, not expecting trouble to arrive is a mistake.
6607
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:32:10 PM »
Last note here since I have to go.
Freedom of speech, freedom of expression, those established laws that protect certain forms of it are false. They're only protecting the arguably more decent aspects of expression and acting upon things.
And you can say that people going out and shooting up other people is an expression because it's a reaction. Getting angry at somebody slapping your girlfriends ass and beating them up is a reaction, and a form of expression. Taking a calmer yet very clear line of approach, is another form of a reaction and expression.
The only thing "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Expression" do, is opt to the better side of expression.
So yes, that shooting falls not under freedom of expression, but it falls under expression because obviously somebody got pissed off about it and went out to shoot some people.
Was it right?
No.
Is it still a form of expression? Yes.
On a scale from severe to not severe, it was severe. It was, arguably, a bad form of expression. But still, an expression.
Did freedom of speech or expression stop the shooters?
No, because they obviously expressed their own opinions quite well now, didn't they?
6608
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:25:25 PM »
However, with their freedom of expression, they'd probably kill you.
Is it freedom of expression if it's illegal?
It certainly isn't a freedom. But that doesn't mean everybody follows the rules now do they? There's a word for people who do illegal things. Criminals.
6609
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:20:35 PM »
However, with their freedom of expression, they'd probably kill you.
What? Since when was murdering a person commensurate with freedom of expression?
It is an expression. It's a reaction. What do you do when you react to something? You express yourself. All the shooting was, is a form of severity of expression. Where some people might form a crowd and go boo, some other people might take it seriously and go for a shootout. It is, a form of expression because it's a response. It's a severe response. One that is most definitely not correct. But it still happened now didn't it?
6610
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:17:29 PM »
Well they kind of were. The group that organized the event is known as an anti-Islam group, so it really isn't that surprising
Right, because being anti-Islam means you're just asking for somebody to come and put a bullet in your head. Just like wearing slutty clothes means you're asking for somebody to come and non-consensually fuck you in your arsehole. That's all this is: sophisticated victim blaming.
I don't give a flying fuck who you are, you're entitled to express your opinions and beliefs and others are entitled to challenge you on such matters. Even when it comes to bigotry. Being a neo-Nazi and holding rallies doesn't give a green light for militant Jews to try and fucking murder you.
Well, actually, it kind of does. Freedom of speech, or freedom of expression right?
You have the freedom of speech to walk up to a group of black people and do this.
However, with their freedom of expression, they'd probably kill you. As such, this is why people withhold things. This is why people keep things private. You can say anything you want in reality. You can do anything you want.
But other people, will act differently based on what you say, and what you do.
Somebody might shrug you off if you called them a cunt in person. Another person might try to beat your ass.
Those people simply got the really deep end of the spectrum in terms of a reaction.
If we're going to argue freedom of speech here, or freedom of expression, then it's all or nothing.
There is no "Oh it's okay so long as you don't kill them." card. It's action, and reaction. And the severity of which both are done.
You can insult them back all you like, or protest in return. Murder doesn't fall under freedom of expression.
That still doesn't remove its reality. That doesn't make it all peachy and not capable of being done by anybody. You of all people should know this because you were born in a country that throws a fit when you take guns away. Take the guns away from the people and make all the laws you want to restrict them, a criminal is a criminal and therfore they'll still find a way to aqcuire guns. Just because there's a barrier on paper, some words that say, "Oh but you can't do that," doesn't excuse reality. I'm not saying what was done was right. But denying that the far end of the spectrum in terms of reactions and forms of expression does not exist, is stupid. Even if it's illegal. That's why you won't see me, or a single user here walk into a crowd of black people and shout niggers. Because we'd be fucking lynched. Even though lynching is arguably illegal to do to somebody.
6611
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:06:19 PM »
Well they kind of were. The group that organized the event is known as an anti-Islam group, so it really isn't that surprising
Right, because being anti-Islam means you're just asking for somebody to come and put a bullet in your head. Just like wearing slutty clothes means you're asking for somebody to come and non-consensually fuck you in your arsehole. That's all this is: sophisticated victim blaming.
I don't give a flying fuck who you are, you're entitled to express your opinions and beliefs and others are entitled to challenge you on such matters. Even when it comes to bigotry. Being a neo-Nazi and holding rallies doesn't give a green light for militant Jews to try and fucking murder you.
Well, actually, it kind of does. Freedom of speech, or freedom of expression right? You have the freedom of speech to walk up to a group of black people and do this. However, with their freedom of expression, they'd probably kill you. As such, this is why people withhold things. This is why people keep things private. You can say anything you want in reality. You can do anything you want. But other people, will act differently based on what you say, and what you do. Somebody might shrug you off if you called them a cunt in person. Another person might try to beat your ass. Those people simply got the really deep end of the spectrum in terms of a reaction. If we're going to argue freedom of speech here, or freedom of expression, then it's all or nothing. There is no "Oh it's okay so long as you don't kill them." card. It's action, and reaction. And the severity of which both are done.
6612
« on: May 04, 2015, 02:00:24 PM »
Because cars are apparently worth more than human lives. Okay then...
They're worth more than a burglar's life.
http://www.humanforsale.com
Go on. Unless the car was a premium hypercar I doubt your statement is at all true. I'm worth two mil, surely a burglar is worth at least $100,000
The burglar is scum, he's worth almost nothing if he wants to steal a car from a defenseless woman.
At what point can we say a crime forfeits someone's life? If I stole someone's iPhone should the respective punishment be losing my hand? No, that's what uneducated bush people in Nairobi think, and we call them savages for a reason.
To be fair after you got your hand lobbed off you might reconsider stealing things. You've only got one chance after that. You either become damn good at stealing and not getting caught or you quit.
6613
« on: May 04, 2015, 01:29:44 PM »
Dis thread doe. Here's a simple solution Nick. Don't take their guns away. You can't change anything so there's really no point in making a fuss over it. Since the very formation of the country there was a rule set in place regarding guns. All citizens have the right to bear arms.
It's an outdated rule in these days because the law was originally made in regards to citizens being able to have some measure of power over a government if the citizens disagreed and a shitty government formed. This was back in the days when guns were essentially new on the block.
Now, with today's standards, society has changed and the old law has no real merit in terms of its original purpose. Not a chance in hell american civilians would stand a chance against the government because things are moving closer and closer towards a police state. And at this point, who can blame them?
Look at all the violence. Guns are ingrained into american culture as a staple way of doing things. You can't change that now mainly because of how deep of a hole there is in regards to violent crime. Every country has their ups and downs and like it or no, you can't really change that these days unless you knocked the entire country down and started over.
There's lots of violence because there's a lot of tools for violence. There's lots of people out there who, obviously, weren't raised decently so the only option you have is to defend yourself when trouble shows up. The police, in turn, who are an organization of people who face the worst, ugliest aspects of humanity every day, are tense for a reason.
If they weren't, they'd be insane.
As such. Grab a chair, sit down in a quieter part of the world, and watch the fireworks. It's none of our business nor is it our concern. Nor can it be changed or altered. All you can do is let things run their course.
So what if the USA has some gun troubles? Mexico has the cartels and corruption. South america, down in Brazil and such, the government is corrupt as shit. Russia is full of xenophobes. The east is going through their version of the crusades. The UK is all wobbly and shifty, and being flooded with folks from the east. Africa is Africa. Canada is selling all of it's own natural rescources and leaving no backup.
Every place on the planet has something. Take your pick and roll with it.
Guns as a right will always be applicable, especially in defense of an encroaching state. An armed populace is much harder to subjugate that an unarmed one, and to argue otherwise is complete ignorance.
But you can't ignore the flipside. An armed populace, especially one that is argueably going down the drain in certain pockets from a societal standpoint, an armed populace will kill itself from the inside out. When shit really hits the fan, and there are that many weapons about. It will be a mess. And it has a greater capacity to turn into a mess. The problem with guns, is that they are tools. You give a tool to somebody who deosn't understand, who doesn't respect it, and they'll be fucking stupid with it. They'll abuse it. All in all I'm not really saying it's the guns themselves that are the problem. You can have a country swimming in guns and that'd be fine, IF, people didn't abuse them. It's the people, that are the problem. Angry and stressed? Take a gun and go shoot somebody. Getting into a heated argument? Take a gun and shoot somebody. Guns are tools and they give people a sense of security and power. An easily fallen back to tool when you have nothing else left at your disposal. It truly does come down to the people. Not the guns themselves.
6614
« on: May 04, 2015, 12:48:23 PM »
I'll have you know I'm actually pretty damn solid at Dark Souls II pvp. I'd actually record my gameplay if I could. Some great moments that would be cool to share.
6615
« on: May 04, 2015, 12:40:12 PM »
Dis thread doe. Here's a simple solution Nick. Don't take their guns away. You can't change anything so there's really no point in making a fuss over it. Since the very formation of the country there was a rule set in place regarding guns. All citizens have the right to bear arms.
It's an outdated rule in these days because the law was originally made in regards to citizens being able to have some measure of power over a government if the citizens disagreed and a shitty government formed. This was back in the days when guns were essentially new on the block.
Now, with today's standards, society has changed and the old law has no real merit in terms of its original purpose. Not a chance in hell american civilians would stand a chance against the government because things are moving closer and closer towards a police state. And at this point, who can blame them?
Look at all the violence. Guns are ingrained into american culture as a staple way of doing things. You can't change that now mainly because of how deep of a hole there is in regards to violent crime. Every country has their ups and downs and like it or no, you can't really change that these days unless you knocked the entire country down and started over.
There's lots of violence because there's a lot of tools for violence. There's lots of people out there who, obviously, weren't raised decently so the only option you have is to defend yourself when trouble shows up. The police, in turn, who are an organization of people who face the worst, ugliest aspects of humanity every day, are tense for a reason.
If they weren't, they'd be insane.
As such. Grab a chair, sit down in a quieter part of the world, and watch the fireworks. It's none of our business nor is it our concern. Nor can it be changed or altered. All you can do is let things run their course.
So what if the USA has some gun troubles? Mexico has the cartels and corruption. South america, down in Brazil and such, the government is corrupt as shit. Russia is full of xenophobes. The east is going through their version of the crusades. The UK is all wobbly and shifty, and being flooded with folks from the east. Africa is Africa. Canada is selling all of it's own natural rescources and leaving no backup.
Every place on the planet has something. Take your pick and roll with it.
6616
« on: May 04, 2015, 10:30:28 AM »
Honestly the ending isn't really bad at all with the Extended Cut. It really makes it a good ending and it doesn't deserve so much blind, ignorant hate. It could have been better, sure, but you can thank EA for rushing them and shoving the game out the door before it was totally complete.
It's just a different colour for each ending. Your choices don't matter in the slightest.
The only ending that isn't a copy of the others is the Deny option.
And that was basically Bioware giving it's fanbase the middle finger for not liking the ending.
Can't blame 'em, especially with EA breathing down their necks. They put in the work they can and then there's a huge uproar on something they've devoted so much time and effort towards? No doubt I'd probably do the same lol
If they honestly believed that an ending that broke just about every promise they made over the last 5 years and completely negated 3 games worth of decisions was going to go over well they deserved every ounce of shit they got for it.
I see that as more of EA's fault and some poor decision making behind doors, and not completely the fault of Bioware themselves.
Well, it was Casey Hudson and some other dude who basically locked themselves in a room and wrote the ending without really giving anything else to the team. I mean yeah, fuck EA too since they rush things too much. But like it or no a studio still carries the weight of what they make because they're the ones who made it in the end. EA just cracks the whip basically.
6617
« on: May 04, 2015, 01:53:10 AM »
I vaguely remember eating pretzels coated in white chocolate as a kid.
Mother of fuck those were good.
6618
« on: May 04, 2015, 01:49:10 AM »
My still functioning original blue special edition xbox that came bundled with Halo CE and Halo 2.
A motorhome.
An antique fire extinguishing globe.
A little token on my keychain from a trip up to churchill.
A metric fuck ton of old intact Bionicles in storage.
And, obligatory.
A big penis.
6619
« on: May 04, 2015, 12:11:57 AM »
I learned how to recompile workshop gma files
I learned how organize said recompiled files into file paths
I learned that SFM is still an uncooperative little bitch with accepting custom files
6620
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:59:24 PM »
Ebin meme guise xDDDDD
You know what I'm going to do? For the sake of fucking lols. I'm going to make you a four legged shotgun trashcan. Give me a day or so. Actually, give me this evening. I'll work something out.
6621
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:56:52 PM »
Because you know, raising your voice Because raising your voice will save somebody.
or shooting in the air is not enough to get someone's attention And potentially killing somebody a mile away as well as giving the attacker time to draw and shoot you if they're armed.
Pointing a gun at someone would be enough to intimidate most people The guy rushed him as he pointed his gun.
- no, you kill a man because who gives a shit - you gotta a gun so you go on a human safari.
There's this thing called "self defense". I know you Eurofags think saying shit like "just run away" isn't laughably pathetic and you consider it a viable and good option, so I'll just wait for the inevitable pacifist bullshit reply about how the criminal's life is worth more than a woman who might be a mother and is being attacked for absolutely no reason.
Enjoy the freedom of being paranoid around cops.
Challenger's whitish though.
Sad thing is, hes right
In USA, every motherfucker and their pet gold fish are armed so the system pretty much works on "shoot first ask questions later."
This is probably why you shouldn't arm every motherfucker in the first place...
Actually, this is why you raise people with some common fucking sense and deceny. Keep a level headed society. It certainly won't curb every crime and make thing peachy.
But it's better than living in paranoia of who's going to shoot whom first, and for what purpose. At this point you can't really fix it though. Take away guns and you'll leave only criminals and cops with guns. Cops don't show up on the dot and they can't be there to save everybody.
It's the way things roll.
Safest bet is to just stay the fuck away from population centers cause it'll only get worse.
But this could have been prevented if the fire hydrants were armed and trash cans could transform into missile silos.
I think you've solved the problem Nick.
More gun.
Set up cameras all over the states with human agiation recognition programs and body language readers. Said cameras all contain high powered snipers. As soon as anything violent happens, boom, the cameras open fire.
Problem solved.
For additional crowd control purposes, trash cans are armoured, mobile with legs and carry shotguns for when violent people duck under the sniper cameras.
Every household should have a tactical warhead - never know when you'll need one. God forbid someone trespasses in your backyard. What if they have a crowbar or something? There's no time to think, nuke their ass to mars before they kill your family.
No no no. You have to do it properly. The trash cans and lamp post cameras watch the streets. Your yard requires a trench, a minefield, barbed wire fences and catchers, and at least several shotgun trash cans. And a sniper tower complete with a warning siren. You have to warn the other soveriegn house states near by.
6622
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:52:30 PM »
Because you know, raising your voice Because raising your voice will save somebody.
or shooting in the air is not enough to get someone's attention And potentially killing somebody a mile away as well as giving the attacker time to draw and shoot you if they're armed.
Pointing a gun at someone would be enough to intimidate most people The guy rushed him as he pointed his gun.
- no, you kill a man because who gives a shit - you gotta a gun so you go on a human safari.
There's this thing called "self defense". I know you Eurofags think saying shit like "just run away" isn't laughably pathetic and you consider it a viable and good option, so I'll just wait for the inevitable pacifist bullshit reply about how the criminal's life is worth more than a woman who might be a mother and is being attacked for absolutely no reason.
Enjoy the freedom of being paranoid around cops.
"I have no rebuttal, so I'll just talk about how corrupt and power hungry the cops are and chalk it up to gun ownership"
Fuck outta here trash.
Cops don't have a choice but to kill because they follow your logic exactly - no time to think because what if that guy is armed too? Better shoot before he does.
That's pure bullshit. Every situation is different and good, well trained cops deal with situations appropriately.
"My" logic is the only logic you should have when holding a firearm. It's not a toy. You don't brandish it or yell while aiming it. You give somebody a verbal warning at most and if they charge you empty that mag into his chest.
Criminals aren't out here playing games. They will end your shit and won't think twice about doing so.
What about cops killing children on playgrounds because they were playing with toy guns? Why does that shit not happen in Canada?
Oh it does. It's just that we have a much less lower rate of gun violence and violence in general. We still have the same stuff that the states does. Just to a very much lesser degree and much tamer.
6623
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:50:52 PM »
Because you know, raising your voice Because raising your voice will save somebody.
or shooting in the air is not enough to get someone's attention And potentially killing somebody a mile away as well as giving the attacker time to draw and shoot you if they're armed.
Pointing a gun at someone would be enough to intimidate most people The guy rushed him as he pointed his gun.
- no, you kill a man because who gives a shit - you gotta a gun so you go on a human safari.
There's this thing called "self defense". I know you Eurofags think saying shit like "just run away" isn't laughably pathetic and you consider it a viable and good option, so I'll just wait for the inevitable pacifist bullshit reply about how the criminal's life is worth more than a woman who might be a mother and is being attacked for absolutely no reason.
Enjoy the freedom of being paranoid around cops.
Challenger's whitish though.
Sad thing is, hes right
In USA, every motherfucker and their pet gold fish are armed so the system pretty much works on "shoot first ask questions later."
This is probably why you shouldn't arm every motherfucker in the first place...
Actually, this is why you raise people with some common fucking sense and deceny. Keep a level headed society. It certainly won't curb every crime and make thing peachy.
But it's better than living in paranoia of who's going to shoot whom first, and for what purpose. At this point you can't really fix it though. Take away guns and you'll leave only criminals and cops with guns. Cops don't show up on the dot and they can't be there to save everybody.
It's the way things roll.
Safest bet is to just stay the fuck away from population centers cause it'll only get worse.
But this could have been prevented if the fire hydrants were armed and trash cans could transform into missile silos.
I think you've solved the problem Nick. More gun. Set up cameras all over the states with human agitation recognition programs and body language readers. Said cameras all contain high powered snipers. As soon as anything violent happens, boom, the cameras open fire. Problem solved. For additional crowd control purposes, trash cans are armoured, mobile with legs and carry shotguns for when violent people duck under the sniper cameras.
6624
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:43:24 PM »
Because you know, raising your voice Because raising your voice will save somebody.
or shooting in the air is not enough to get someone's attention And potentially killing somebody a mile away as well as giving the attacker time to draw and shoot you if they're armed.
Pointing a gun at someone would be enough to intimidate most people The guy rushed him as he pointed his gun.
- no, you kill a man because who gives a shit - you gotta a gun so you go on a human safari.
There's this thing called "self defense". I know you Eurofags think saying shit like "just run away" isn't laughably pathetic and you consider it a viable and good option, so I'll just wait for the inevitable pacifist bullshit reply about how the criminal's life is worth more than a woman who might be a mother and is being attacked for absolutely no reason.
Enjoy the freedom of being paranoid around cops.
Challenger's whitish though.
Sad thing is, hes right
In USA, every motherfucker and their pet gold fish are armed so the system pretty much works on "shoot first ask questions later."
This is probably why you shouldn't arm every motherfucker in the first place...
Actually, this is why you raise people with some common fucking sense and deceny. Keep a level headed society. It certainly won't curb every crime and make thing peachy. But it's better than living in paranoia of who's going to shoot whom first, and for what purpose. At this point you can't really fix it though. Take away guns and you'll leave only criminals and cops with guns. Cops don't show up on the dot and they can't be there to save everybody. It's the way things roll. Safest bet is to just stay the fuck away from population centers cause it'll only get worse.
6625
« on: May 03, 2015, 07:33:07 PM »
or shooting in the air
You never do this.
Ever.
Something something Gravity's a bitch..... Something something Isaac Newton being a deadly bitch....
6626
« on: May 03, 2015, 11:49:12 AM »
Anxiety. A right bundle of cheer. I never had it in the manner that you described but way back when I was younger I'd freeze at the thought of going out anywhere public. People'd try talking to me and I couldn't bring myself to say anything. Couldn't bring myself to go out and about in public.
6627
« on: May 03, 2015, 01:46:58 AM »
 I wanted to do a little twist on the old viking mythology regarding Draugr. Picture not done yet, just an in progress shot.
6628
« on: May 02, 2015, 11:35:33 PM »
All the Filipinos in my town are having big get togethers to watch that fight. Judging by how enthusiastic they are, I'll throw my hat in with them.
6629
« on: May 02, 2015, 10:27:45 PM »
 Confirmed. Founder of the Illuminati. Ya'll can go home now.
6630
« on: May 02, 2015, 10:26:09 PM »
Okay, so what did he get banned for now?
meatspin
Cam the Sham and Dustbin given another vacation.
All is well in the world today.
Yup, early and permanent retirement for the both of them now.
Can't say I'll miss them too much. Even still. Kinda blows that it has to come down to this though. I find it rather funny. With the amount of bolony they dish out they sure do arrive back here rather quickly after their ban is up.
Which essentially means they're about as lost as all the other exiles from Bungie.
Ashes to ashes, goodbye shitposters.
Yeah, it is a real shame.
I mean, if Dustin just dropped all of the bullshit and stopped his sad attempts to troll a forum that's been milked completely dry he probably could have gotten along quite well. He is a smart chap, but it's a pity it's wasted by some of the crap he liked to pull.
Yeah, Dustin reminds me a good deal of this one person I know in real life. Pretty smart person, but he just pisses it all away on trying to screw around with people and he's probably gonna end up as a loser. Kind of sad to watch the whole thing. Though Dustin doesn't seem like the type who would become a loser.
because he already is
That's not really fair to say since none of us probably have any idea what sorts of things he does in real life. He could be a self-made millionaire for all we know honestly.
he isn't though
he's a loser that projects on the internet whilst crying in his squeaker voice
And again. We don't really know anything about him other than his trolling so why even bother with trying to make judgement about him.
If he's supposedly intelligent to a degree then he wouldn't act in such way. In fact, acting in such a manner the way he currently does, states something true about him.
He's not intelligent.
Being smart, being intelligent, isn't measurable and accurate to what degree or job you may hold, or what amount of wealth you may have above others.
It's the ability to make rational decisions, take logical actions, and exert basic level self control.
As such, he's a retard. If he chooses to ignore that he may have a decent head on him, and act like a sack of old sacks, then I'm sorry, there's not much smarts to him save for his accumulated knowledge. Knowledge doesn't make you intelligent. What you do with it, does.
Basically:
Wisdom > Knowledge
Not really. You need experience to have knowledge. You need to have knowledge to be wise. It's just that the more you know, the more you should be aware of things. You should choose to go the better way of doing things. You should understand how you yourself function, and pick the better road to go about walking down.
Pages: 1 ... 219220221 222223 ... 390
|
Show Posts